Oil Money in Football | New City expose

jontheblue said:
I don't know - would you accept prosecution for an offence if there was no evidence or if the evidence was gained in a manner that the UK didn't accept was admissable ? What about if you had signed a binding settlement ?
Click to expand...
UEFA opened an investigation against PSG without any evidence of wrongdoing. The City leaks definitely warrant an investigation, especially since there was no logic in PSG having one and not City in the first place. Of course the leaked data itself shouldn't be used in court if not confirmed by other means.

I think they are waiting for the CAS conclusions on the PSG appeal against that procedure to be safer about what they can do about City.
 
jontheblue said:
I don't know - would you accept prosecution for an offence if there was no evidence or if the evidence was gained in a manner that the UK didn't accept was admissable ? What about if you had signed a binding settlement ?
Click to expand...
That's exactly why UEFA should reopen enquiries- to obtain new evidence in this case. It certainly warrants further investigation now.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
The reality is that if you have a team of competent lawyers on retainer, you can make legal proceedings go on forever (especially in this case where the actual basis of the rules is unstable). The sad truth is that you don't always win a case because you're legally right, it's sometimes (often?) down to resources.
Click to expand...

Only if theres actually a case to be actually fought, if the rules were as tight and legal as they should be then the case would be dismissed, also thats not generally how things work in the ECJ because its not a like theres years and years worth of discovery to work through nor settlement negotiations, its a case of judicial review. Also, its UEFA we're talking about, a Supranational organisation. Not some local business getting their arse kicked by a multinational, of course you can buy better lawyers etc but theirs a process of diminishing returns, there's no one out there charging 1million dollars an hour fees. I very much doubt Uefa have some local no win no fee chump lawyer. Of course city are wealthy but UEFA don't do too badly.
 
Jack - City Fan said:
Only if theres actually a case to be actually fought, if the rules were as tight and legal as they should be then the case would be dismissed, also thats not generally how things work in the ECJ because its not a like theres years and years worth of discovery to work through nor settlement negotiations, its a case of judicial review. Also, its UEFA we're talking about, a Supranational organisation. Not some local business getting their arse kicked by a multinational, of course you can buy better lawyers etc but theirs a process of diminishing returns, there's no one out there charging 1million dollars an hour fees. I very much doubt Uefa have some local no win no fee chump lawyer. Of course city are wealthy but UEFA don't do too badly.
Click to expand...
There is always a case to be fought and the rules are rarely 'tight and legal' whatever that means. That's exactly how lawyers earn their living.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
There is always a case to be fought and the rules are rarely 'tight and legal' whatever that means. That's exactly how lawyers earn their living.
Click to expand...

I know, I am one. And what I was saying is that the rules are required to be tightly restrained and legal within the Framework of European Law.
There isn't always a legal case to be fought, many are immediately dismissed when there is found to be no case to be answered. But if you're suggesting that legal rules are always so undefined as to be able to be challenged for years and years on end, you're incorrect. This isn't a legal case based on facts where a claim can be put in and then the parties can spend months in discovery, so much as it would be a case of judicial review, that is how well the framework of the rules fit within the constraints defined by EU law. It might take a while for the court to get referred to the ECJ (Which is unlikely as they've already established jurisdiction over FFP in the case I previously linked in my post) but to suggest once it was there it would be held up for years and years is entirely incorrect.

Suggesting theres always a case to be fought is a fallacy, theres always a case to be fought when theres a reasonable dispute in the law, if theres a reasonable dispute in the law, it being brought before the courts isn't a bad thing as it resolves the dispute for the future, regardless of who wins.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
So am I :)
And if you are too, you know you're being disingenuous in this whole argument, if you're suggesting that City wouldn't be able to hold this whole case up for years thanks to a legal team on an endless payroll.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's a jurisdictional difference we're having, or maybe you have different specialties than me but I really don't think they'd be able to. The rules on malicious litigation are pretty strict and the ECJ is a court which actually views cases very quickly. It's not a case where there'd be years and years of negotiations between parties and suits and countersuits like the old Samsung/Apple cases. It's literally a case of Judicial Review. Even if City were able to I'm not sure why it would be a bad thing. It's Uefa, not some minnow, they can afford lawyers themselves and if it finally gave FFP clarity id be more than happy for these companies to throw their millions at each other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rooney in Paris
Jack - City Fan said:
Maybe it's a jurisdictional difference we're having, or maybe you have different specialties than me but I really don't think they'd be able to. The rules on malicious litigation are pretty strict and the ECJ is a court which actually views cases very quickly. It's not a case where there'd be years and years of negotiations between parties and suits and countersuits like the old Samsung/Apple cases. It's literally a case of Judicial Review. Even if City were able to I'm not sure why it would be a bad thing. It's Uefa, not some minnow, they can afford lawyers themselves and if it finally gave FFP clarity id be more than happy for these companies to throw their millions at each other.
Click to expand...
I don't agree on the first part of your message, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree!
As for the bolded point, my view on it being a 'bad' thing is in the case where it's frivilous and just trying to delay the outcome (which you don't agree on).
 
Rooney in Paris said:
I don't agree on the first part of your message, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree!
As for the bolded point, my view on it being a 'bad' thing is in the case where it's frivilous and just trying to delay the outcome (which you don't agree on).
Click to expand...

Yeh I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree. I think we have a different view of the effectiveness of the courts ahah, perhaps you've been in practice longer than me. But I still stand by that we could stop having these conversations about it if there was a proper challenge that either succeeded or got slapped back down by the courts. But in the mean time it looks like we'll just have to put up with these rules that dont make anyone happy, not properly enforced by UEFA for fear of action and pissed on by clubs for not being scary enough.
 
In the interests of fair competition, surely even City fans can agree that their owners have taken it too far?
They haven’t been subtle in any way shape or form.
It really isn’t an exciting watch, if for example, you plonked Usain Bolt onto an amateur athletics meeting’s 100 metres race.
You know who is going to win.
Enjoyable sport, is when you can’t be sure who is going to win. Everyone loses interest if it’s a foregone conclusion.
If the owners of City had reigned back the spending and had been a lot more subtle, there would have been more respect for their success. As it is, they have bred hatred and suspicion. There is no fun in watching paint dry.
 
OldSchoolManc said:
In the interests of fair competition, surely even City fans can agree that their owners have taken it too far?
They haven’t been subtle in any way shape or form.
It really isn’t an exciting watch, if for example, you plonked Usain Bolt onto an amateur athletics meeting’s 100 metres race.
You know who is going to win.
Enjoyable sport, is when you can’t be sure who is going to win. Everyone loses interest if it’s a foregone conclusion.
If the owners of City had reigned back the spending and had been a lot more subtle, there would have been more respect for their success. As it is, they have bred hatred and suspicion. There is no fun in watching paint dry.
Click to expand...

There was no fun in watching United lift the title 13 times in 20 years for City fans. City have won a grand total of 7 trophies in 10 years since the takeover. They've never retained a title and only since Guardiola has taken over have they even looked remotely like they'll be able to.

This lack of competition argument that comes out is an argument that has a very short memory.

Question the legitimacy of the money and the owners but any talk about a lack of competition is outright rubbish.
 
Manchester United isn't were it is because of oil money. The problem isn't not being filthy rich. It's because the owners take too much money and lack quality vision.
 
Andrew Wolf said:
There was no fun in watching United lift the title 13 times in 20 years for City fans. City have won a grand total of 7 trophies in 10 years since the takeover. They've never retained a title and only since Guardiola has taken over have they even looked remotely like they'll be able to.

This lack of competition argument that comes out is an argument that has a very short memory.

Question the legitimacy of the money and the owners but any talk about a lack of competition is outright rubbish.
Click to expand...

Becoming successful doesn’t happen overnight. But City are nearly there. Once they win the Champions League and if Pep decides to stay for 15 years you guys will dominate the league just like Juventus, PSG and Bayern are doing. The league will be dull as dishwater. And if someone else does win the league you will just outspend everyone. Not being funny you spent £200m when finishing 4th, £200m the season after then paid £67m for a player that isn’t a guaranteed starter, it’s become a joke.

It was rare for United to steam ahead of the rest of the league, there was generally always a rival for the title except maybe Ferguson’s last season and 99/00 (or 00/01, can’t remember). And whilst United did spend money they rarely spent 25-50% more than their nearest rivals. Ferguson went a bit mad when we bought Veron and Van Nistelrooy in one summer but I can’t remember another season where we spent much more than our rivals.
 
manc exile said:
https://boltfromtheblue.live/2018/11/18/how-uefa-shifted-the-goalposts-to-shaft-man-city/

just so we can see the view from the other side
Click to expand...
So he's basically saying FIFA deliberately changed the rules (re wages) to trap City, that if City add up all of the allowances (and I'm not sure he's right about all of them), they might be ok, but.... doesn't comment on the value of the sponsorship deals (which I think have to be proven to be at close to market rates?)

It's a conspiracy.
 
Andrew Wolf said:
There was no fun in watching United lift the title 13 times in 20 years for City fans. City have won a grand total of 7 trophies in 10 years since the takeover. They've never retained a title and only since Guardiola has taken over have they even looked remotely like they'll be able to.

This lack of competition argument that comes out is an argument that has a very short memory.

Question the legitimacy of the money and the owners but any talk about a lack of competition is outright rubbish.
Click to expand...

United did it with a core of youth players, shrewdly acquired talent from abroad like Vidic, Stam, Evra etc and plenty of dubious squad players like O’Shea, Evans, Gibson, Phil Neville, Welbeck etc - they earned the right to win via valid strategy and sporting project; Guardiola has £60m substitutes.

The final decade of the Ferguson dynasty saw United up against Sugar Daddy clubs like Chelsea (for whom Kenyon signed United-scouted targets like Robben, Cech, Mikel etc) and City, and still winning.

The margins were generally narrow - Macheda, a kid from the youth team thrown on in desperation, practically decided the title in 2009, and the Premier League on the whole was far more competitive.

When City’s bench would start for every other team in the league, it’s no surprise they win.
 
Has this topic lost its attention in the media / among fans?

No news on UEFA’S / FA’s view on this?

I guess it is sadly to be expected that this will have no real consequences (neither in the competitions or just to the reputation of City)
 
Last edited:
And what exactly would a Champions League ban do to city?? All it would achieve is assist them to win every domestic trophy even more so then normal with no extra games to worry about.
The players won't care too much about a year or two out of UEFA competitions,
Surely a club that's flouted rules so blatantly require a somewhat stronger punishment?
 
Champ said:
And what exactly would a Champions League ban do to city?? All it would achieve is assist them to win every domestic trophy even more so then normal with no extra games to worry about.
The players won't care too much about a year or two out of UEFA competitions,
Surely a club that's flouted rules so blatantly require a somewhat stronger punishment?
Click to expand...

Eh?

UEFA can’t exactly ban them from the premier league or deduct them points. That’s up to the premier league. Financial punishment in this case would be useless.

A ban is the best UEFA can do and hope City comply with FFP.

It’s for the premier league to take action domestic wise. But I don’t see them doing that.
 
Bojan11 said:
Eh?

UEFA can’t exactly ban them from the premier league or deduct them points. That’s up to the premier league. Financial punishment in this case would be useless.

A ban is the best UEFA can do and hope City comply with FFP.

It’s for the premier league to take action domestic wise. But I don’t see them doing that.
Click to expand...
I wasn't asked by for a ban from the premiership :lol: not sure where my post stated that?

Just merely stating that a ban from the Champions League isn't really a punishment, it's like taking pocket money away from a teenager who's still got access to his bank account.

I agree it's up to the FA to punish City if these allegations are found to be true, but surely UEFA can come up with a longer term punishment rather than banning for a season or two,
 
Champ said:
I wasn't asked by for a ban from the premiership :lol: not sure where my post stated that?

Just merely stating that a ban from the Champions League isn't really a punishment, it's like taking pocket money away from a teenager who's still got access to his bank account.

I agree it's up to the FA to punish City if these allegations are found to be true, but surely UEFA can come up with a longer term punishment rather than banning for a season or two,
Click to expand...
It's a major punishment for the players, manager and club if they are banned from the European Cup.

If they were banned for two years than that is a major issue for the players that are there, the Champions League is the one they all want to and have yet to win.
 
It's sad to say, but we wont win the league the next 5-10 years because we'll never be able to compete with the oil-clubs in the long run.

Sure we can steal one or two players like Sanchez or Fred, but that'll limit our spending on other players while City or PSG just buys another good player if one fails.

That great post about our spend adjusted for inflation really said a lot. We're able to spend about half of what they do. And we're a top 3 club when it comes to commercial income.

And add to that, that if Pellegrini is paid indirectly/secretly through other arrangements with the Abu Dhabi family, of course the same options are probably explored with players to give them an extremely high salary, which forces the hand of the player and undermines both the price City will give for the player, and the competition as normal clubs can't spend the same. How can we know this is not just the tip of the iceberg?
 
CA1 said:
It's a major punishment for the players, manager and club if they are banned from the European Cup.

If they were banned for two years than that is a major issue for the players that are there, the Champions League is the one they all want to and have yet to win.
Click to expand...
But it's not really is it??
United still signed top players despite being out of the Champions League, so have Arsenal, Chelsea etc. Also United and other clubs kept hold of their best players despite being out of the CL. This myth that champions League is all players are interested in has gone too far, it's simply not true for vast majority of players in the short term.
Whilst some players no doubt want to play in the champions League and will move to a club competing in that comp, I'm sure most at City would stay for the wages they are on and the fact that they are guaranteed domestic trophies, especially with no extra European games to play.
It may be a slight stain on the club's reputation, but I highly doubt it would have any long term damage, let's not forget they have been punished before in the champions League by UEFA with no great shakes to their 'image'
 
CL ban is the best we can hope for. Not that it would matter to them though, they'll just win everything else domestically.

I could be wrong but I don't think there is any rules in place domestically about spending. Therefore, there will be no punishment in England unfortunately. Kinda sad, they've blatantly cheated other clubs out of success, CL and PL spots.
 
SuperiorXI said:
Can this be dressed up any way other than blatant cheating of the highest order? Why has the UK media not said anything?
Click to expand...
No.

Even if you don't agree with the rules, it is still cheating so I'm not sure how there can be any defence.

Even the City fans are just resigned now, they know it's all been a lie. They'll just hope they can bribe UEFA or that UEFA can't fully prove it.
 
Should be a 5 year ban from the CL, in addition to the FA pulling their fingers out and deducting points/relegations.

By not doing anything, they are condemning competitive football to be a perpetual joke.
 
Is anyone else sick that Man City get so much praise by pundits etc? They have no pressure to make a profit and no pressure to please shareholders. They are basically a vanity object for their owners imo.

They spend £60m in every position and whoop de doo, they have a good team, shock horror.

I know Utd spend big too, but all of this money is organically generated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: SteveJ
Champ said:
And what exactly would a Champions League ban do to city?? All it would achieve is assist them to win every domestic trophy even more so then normal with no extra games to worry about.
Click to expand...
They'd have the rubber stamp of cheats on them. It'd be nice to make it official.
 
Champ said:
And what exactly would a Champions League ban do to city?? All it would achieve is assist them to win every domestic trophy even more so then normal with no extra games to worry about.
The players won't care too much about a year or two out of UEFA competitions,
Surely a club that's flouted rules so blatantly require a somewhat stronger punishment?
Click to expand...

Just a guess but make them stop doing whatever it is they allegedly did to get the banned in the first place.
 
CA1 said:
No.

Even if you don't agree with the rules, it is still cheating so I'm not sure how there can be any defence.

Even the City fans are just resigned now, they know it's all been a lie. They'll just hope they can bribe UEFA or that UEFA can't fully prove it.
Click to expand...
Maybe the media and UEFA/FA are too chicken shit to do anything because of the previous threats of legal action.
 
stevoc said:
Just a guess but make them stop doing whatever it is they allegedly did to get the banned in the first place.
Click to expand...
But it's not worked previously, evident by the punishment they have had already?!
 
Champ said:
But it's not worked previously, evident by the punishment they have had already?!
Click to expand...

The punishments they've received in the past fines and minor squad restrictions were never going to deter them. But an actual ban from the Champions League most likely would make them take notice. A big part of the City project is the exposure the Champions League gives them, so they won't want a second ban i wouldn't imagine.

Having said that i doubt they will even get a ban.
 
steakpie said:
Is anyone else sick that Man City get so much praise by pundits etc? They have no pressure to make a profit and no pressure to please shareholders. They are basically a vanity object for their owners imo.

They spend £60m in every position and whoop de doo, they have a good team, shock horror.

I know Utd spend big too, but all of this money is organically generated.
Click to expand...

Indeed - they win because they have players on the bench who’d walk into every other team in the league, at the lowest point of overall quality in the Premier League era, yet pundits are wanking over them like they’ve developed their own class of 92, achieved what Clough did against the odds or done a Leicester.

In no other sport would a competitor with such unnatural, substantial advantages be permitted to ‘compete’ against others - it’s such clearly defined categorical criteria that validates the term ‘sport’; weight classes in boxing/MMA, handicapping in horse racing etc all preserve the prestige of the competitions.

Usain Bolt wouldn’t get excited about beating me in a 100m sprint, yet City’s dirty owners and deluded fans get giddy about a decade disproportionate investment, bribery and potential (IMO probable) doping- coinciding with a substantial decline in Premier League quality - resulting in the inevitability of winning.

Bless them. Pity them - they clearly depend upon the charity of their Sharia sugar daddy to validate their lives.
 
Champ said:
And what exactly would a Champions League ban do to city?? All it would achieve is assist them to win every domestic trophy even more so then normal with no extra games to worry about.
The players won't care too much about a year or two out of UEFA competitions,
Surely a club that's flouted rules so blatantly require a somewhat stronger punishment?
Click to expand...

The CL is the one competition City haven’t won yet. That’s the one they want. Of course it’s a big deal to be banned from it, you’re being silly.
 
stevoc said:
The punishments they've received in the past fines and minor squad restrictions were never going to deter them. But an actual ban from the Champions League most likely would make them take notice. A big part of the City project is the exposure the Champions League gives them, so they won't want a second ban i wouldn't imagine.

Having said that i doubt they will even get a ban.
Click to expand...

Correct. They get a ban and it ends up in court. With a case that UEFA know damn well they have a fair chance of losing. And will cost them squillions to defend. All because they tried to introduce a 'rule' designed to protect a handful of self-entitled clubs who could see their place at the top table being threatened.
 
ianw16 said:
Correct. They get a ban and it ends up in court. With a case that UEFA know damn well they have a fair chance of losing. And will cost them squillions to defend. All because they tried to introduce a 'rule' designed to protect a handful of self-entitled clubs who could see their place at the top table being threatened.
Click to expand...
If City lost, they'd never compete in a UEFA competition again. A big risk for them too I imagine.

I don't think the courts would be quite as interested in this as City fans make out.

Football is a made up game with made up rules. Sporting competition isn't high on their list at all. Any football rule could be challenged in court the same way. Being sent off a pitch for picking up a ball probably infringes human rights somehwere along the line. The two don't mix. You agree to the rules.

City tried to comply, made out like they were complying and cheated the rule they signed up to and agreed to.
 
ianw16 said:
Correct. They get a ban and it ends up in court. With a case that UEFA know damn well they have a fair chance of losing. And will cost them squillions to defend. All because they tried to introduce a 'rule' designed to protect a handful of self-entitled clubs who could see their place at the top table being threatened.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure it's possible but i personally think if there was a case to be made and more importantly a high chance of winning that case. Then either Abu Dhabi and/or Qatar would have tried it by now. The same rules are in place for every club, all clubs including City and PSG agreed to abide by them. You can't agree to comply with rules, try to cheat them (if they have), get caught and then cry that the rules are unfair after the fact.
 
stevoc said:
I wouldn't be so sure it's possible but i personally think if there was a case to be made and more importantly a high chance of winning that case. Then either Abu Dhabi and/or Qatar would have tried it by now. The same rules are in place for every club, all clubs including City and PSG agreed to abide by them. You can't agree to comply with rules, try to cheat them (if they have), get caught and then cry that the rules are unfair after the fact.
Click to expand...

It is a protectionist rule, and I couldn't care less how City got around it. It had nothing whatever to do with preventing another Portsmouth or Leeds scenario. It was a bent rule to protect the elite. As Platini has essentially admitted. Therefore I don't care what my club had to do to circumvent it. We'll see how keen UEFA are to investigate this. My bet is that they will do everything possible to ignore it. Infantino was one of the brokers of the deal that saw City given a slap on the wrist initially.
It was OK for Chelsea to spend their way into the elite, but when City did the same thing, Chelsea were one of the ones backing FFP, because they'd already done the initial spend, and were then in a situation to comply! I doubt you'll find any City fans losing sleep over what the club did or didn't do, nor over what UEFA will respond with. Particularly when the people making the biggest noise about this are La Liga and Bayern! Remember, La Liga hosted two clubs who were essentially government funded, and were getting dodgy deals that saved them millions. And one of the initial whiners about the need for FFP was Berlusconi!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.